Re: [PATCH 0/2] gpio: 74x164: use a compatible fallback and don't extend the driver

["Csókás Bence" <csokas.bence@prolan.hu>]

Hi,

On 2025. 01. 10. 14:00, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> 
> There were other suggested solutions (for instance: just use the
> existing compatible for the On Semi variant) but I figured the most
> common approach is to use a fallback value for 100% compatible models
> and this is what Rob suggested as well.
> 
> This reverts the driver change and makes the "onnn,74hc595a" compatible
> use "fairchild,74hc595" as fallback.

Is there any reason to introduce a new compatible name at all? Does some 
pre-existing, widely-used DT blob use it in the wild already? If not, 
then I don't think it's necessary; for any new boards, their DT's 
authors should just use the pre-existing names.

I'm especially against introducing a new, vendor-specific (On Semi, in 
this case) name; if we really want to introduce a new compatible, at 
least make it as generic as possible, i.e. `generic,74x595`, or even 
`generic,spi-shift-register-output`.

> Bartosz Golaszewski (2):
>    Revert "gpio: 74x164: Add On Semi MC74HC595A compat"
>    dt-bindings: gpio: fairchild,74hc595: use a fallback for Semi
>      MC74HC595A
> 
>   .../devicetree/bindings/gpio/fairchild,74hc595.yaml    | 10 ++++++----
>   drivers/gpio/gpio-74x164.c                             |  2 --
>   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Bence